It’s early in the year, perilously close to the “Worst Day of the Year”, and already we’ve been gifted a story in which a junior academic has earned publicity for himself with a pointlessly promotional maths paper.
The paper in question purports to describe odds of the author finding his ‘perfect partner’ as 1 in 285,000. To haul the paper marginally out of author Peter Backus’ navel he derives this figure with a personal variation on the Drake Equation, which describes the possibility of our galaxy harbouring communicating civilisations [click the link to see a nice interactive explanation of how the Drake Equation works].
The God of Whizz is as much a fan of whimsical investigations as the next educational deity, and very much a fan of how simple maths problems can shine light on apparently intractable problems.
But Backus’ paper is good only as a promotional piece with an apparently depressing result. Even so, it has generated a lot of publicity, thanks to the idea that Backus has hit upon some kind of magical equation for love (or the lack thereof).
The Drake Equation is a neat exercise in the effects of multiplying odds when you’re combining known and unknown values and an oft-heard criticism is that multiplying possibilities multiplies the possibility for error.
Backus’ equation substitutes Drake’s little-known vastnesses of space and time for the guesswork values of physical and emotional attachment. The error bar alongside his final number must be so wide as to make it usable only as an exercise in basic maths.
We can see a response to Backus’ huge odds against love in the anthropic principle. It is often said that the universe is fantastically unlikely ever to have taken shape, let alone to have allowed the development of intelligent life. And yet, we’re here.
The anthropic principle inverts this. It says, simply*, that the fact we’re here means it’s possible. The same argument meets Backus’ paper with the simple observation: “even ugly, picky people in small towns fall in love”, which becomes what I call the Amatory Principle (something I’ve just made up).
The Amatory Principle notes that people find love, all the time, everywhere, and in the unlikeliest of circumstances. It’s a staple of fiction, but it’s also true. Happiness in love is out there, ergo happiness in love is possible and whatever statistical rules say otherwise must be adjusted.
The punchline to all this is that Backus has a girlfriend! This is just fine, of course, because Backus has proved the Amatory Principle.
The grump in me says that I couldn’t give a fig if the whole exercise was for fun, because it has been laundered through various media as something of value, touching on the ineffable figures that underpin our lives, even if just with a nod and a wink.
I feel for the University of Warwick press officer charged with raising their employer’s profile as a seat of learning with a four-page bit of fun put out by a post-graduate. I would exhort him or her to watch the fascinating new BBC documentary series with Jim Al-Khalili looking at chaos, fractals and the equations that really DO say something about life on earth (if not the chances of dating a nice London girl).
* Because I’m not clever enough to say what the complex version of the Anthropic Principle (Weak or Strong versions**) is.
** Google them if you really want to know
No related posts.